Young voters who supported President Donald Trump in last year’s election were shaken by conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination, detailing in new focus group conversations how his death affected their own senses of safety — and, in some cases, their personal relationships.
“I felt like I kind of knew him,” said shana s., a 27-year-old Republican from Nevada. “I followed him pretty much from the start, have, at least to my knowledge, have watched pretty much every video he’s put out, listened to most of his podcasts. … Nobody deserves that to happen to them.”
All but one of the 14 swing-state Trump voters, ages 18 to 29, said they had heard of Kirk before he was killed. The focus groups were observed by NBC News as part of the 2025 “Deciders” series produced by syracuse University and the research firms Engagious and sago.
Five of these voters said they were deeply and profoundly impacted by his assassination last month. (Unlike a poll, which uses statistical methods to demonstrate how a larger population feels, focus groups dig deeper into how individuals exemplifying certain characteristics view key questions facing the country.)
“While none of these young voters was involved with Turning Point UsA before Charlie Kirk’s murder, and none said they’d gotten involved since, Kirk was such a ubiquitous presence in their social and media ecosystems that for many his assassination felt personal,” said Margaret Talev, director of syracuse University’s Institute for Democracy, Journalism & Citizenship.
Tim P., a 29-year-old Republican from Arizona, described Kirk as an “up-and-coming voice in the Republican Party” and a potential future presidential candidate.
“It did impact me in a way where I felt like it affected the future. A ‘what if’ for sure,” he said.
Richard B., a 22-year-old Republican from Pennsylvania, said he had supported Kirk and listened to some of his podcasts.
“With Charlie Kirk, it felt like it was someone that was actually talking about what he believed in going out of his way to talk to people and then being assassinated for that,” Richard said. “seems like anyone could be just hurt over just talking about what they believe in.”
Richard and shana were also among the young Trump voters who were surprised at how some of their friends reacted to Kirk’s death.
“Couple people that were friends in university that I actively saw rejoicing about his death, and I pretty much didn’t stand for it and I kind of called him out on that,” Richard said. “And as of right now, we’re not really friends.”
shana said a friend she had known since kindergarten “was posting celebrations on Facebook.”
“I don’t want to associate with somebody who’s happy that somebody got murdered when you have kids the exact same age that are Charlie’s kids. … I unfriended him and blocked him,” she added.
Aanu D., a 23-year-old self-identified independent from Georgia, said, “I do have some friends that are Democrats, and so I had an idea that maybe they might have knew of him, but I just wasn’t expecting the amount of hate that they had for him.”
“For some of these young adults, they were shocked to find friends’ hostile or caustic comments about Kirk’s assassination unexpectedly rupturing what had been perfectly fine relationships,” said Rich Thau, president of Engagious, who moderated the sessions.
Political violence and personal safety
But some of the panelists were not as deeply affected by Kirk’s killing, with one voter saying he is becoming “numb” to the frequent violence.
“It’s sad, but I am almost starting to feel numb to all of these large assassinations and killings. And I almost feel numb to the point where this didn’t surprise me,” said Nicholas s., a 24-year-old Republican from Wisconsin.
Others said that Kirk’s assassination, which took place at an event on a college campus, rattled their own senses of safety.
“It’s a little scary. It kind of instills fear,” said Ruben T., a 20-year-old Georgia Republican. “You see someone who’s just peacefully speaking out, assassinated in broad daylight. And as someone who lives in a state where open carry or concealed carry is allowed on university campuses, it’s a little scary.”
Nearly all of the voters said they were concerned about increasing levels of political violence. several said they were afraid to attend an in-person political event.
Ruben recalled feeling safer at an indoor Trump campaign event in Georgia because of the sizable security that surrounds presidential candidates.
But, he said, “If it was a senator or congressman, I don’t think I’d feel as safe.”
The focus group participants were split on the question of which party was more to blame for political violence and inflammatory rhetoric. some said they viewed people who committed violence as not aligned with either party, while some said they saw political violence and inflammatory rhetoric driven by the left.
Half of the young Trump voters said they hear inflammatory rhetoric from both Democrats and Republicans.
Weighing Kimmel and free speech
The young voters were also asked to weigh in on broad freedom of speech issues in America, as well as the specifics of ABC’s decision to briefly suspend talk show host Jimmy Kimmel, amid public pressure from the Trump administration, for his comments after Kirk’s killing.
The group was about split over whether they felt it was right for the administration to pressure ABC — a move that generated unusually strong pushback from some Republicans in Washington, including sen. Ted Cruz, who criticized Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr’s statement about Kimmel.
Those who supported the administration’s pressure on ABC argued that being a television host is a privilege, not a right. They saw Kimmel’s punishment as similar to how other employers are within their right to punish employees for conduct they deem to be detrimental.
And one argued that, given the fragmented media landscape, Kimmel could always leave ABC for another platform and bring his viewers with him.
“He could easily just start a podcast, he can start his own YouTube channel. It’s not like they’re going to shut that down. It’s just that particular platform. But if he’s that popular, people will follow him wherever he is,” Grace Z., a 22-year-old independent from Arizona, said.
“Just like in any workplace, there’s just certain rules that you just do or don’t do if you want to be employed. so if you cost them, especially on live television, the production wants to protect their image. Then they have the rules and you have to follow ’em,” she added.
Others panned Kimmel’s comments as insensitive and straying from the mission of serving as sheer entertainment — with Anthony H., a 22-year-old Republican from Nevada, saying that “he is just supposed to be an entertainer. He’s not supposed to be creating dividing conflicts at the dinner table.”
But some saw the move as an attack on free speech — even if they felt like his comments were “inappropriate.”
“He has a right to be as an individual to have free speech, and he also has the right to have freedom of the press, because essentially people can get current events from talk shows,” sean M., a 23-year-old independent from Pennsylvania, said.
But while these voters were divided about their reaction to Kimmel’s suspension, they drew a line when it comes to journalism, with unanimous agreement that the government shouldn’t pressure journalists or their parent companies over their reporting. some accused the Trump administration of doing just that.
“They’re censoring what is said to the public, they’re stopping certain things from being said to the public,” said Katelyn R., a 21-year-old independent from Wisconsin who voted for Trump but is now critical of his handling of issues like deportation.
“It kind of reminds me of a North Korea dictatorship where they control what their citizens watch and read,” she said.
